2014 Official Draft Thread

[SDFan]

Funny bc at the time I wanted Gonzalez over Davis.

my recollection is NOrv wanted Gonzalez as well, but Indy drafted just before us and took Gonzalez. Then AJ took BUSTed Davis and they tried to pretend that was who they wanted all along because he fit our offense better.

[Steve]

Maybe this is me being soured on him, but I still think that this was a Norv pick. Yes, AJ made the call, but I still think he was doing it to please his new HC.

Buster ran a lot of routes well that we liked to go to, and had some similarities to Henry Ellard, who Norv had been coaching with the Rams.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

my recollection is NOrv wanted Gonzalez as well, but Indy drafted just before us and took Gonzalez. Then AJ took BUSTed Davis and they tried to pretend that was who they wanted all along because he fit our offense better.

Gonzalez was selected two spots after we took Davis.

AG had a nice start to his career but the injuries slowed his production and brought his career to a premature end. I recently read that he is in law school at Stanford.

[Yubaking]

Just because a CB is short doesn't mean he can only play vs the slot. Many CB give up height to taller WR. I would prefer height, but I would also rather have skillful players then fall into useless stereotypes. All that putting height requirements on CB is going to do is price us out of having the best athlete. Revis is only 5'10 or 5'11, yet he is still the best CB in football, because he has great movement skills. Maybe we would do that, get guys who can simply play, regardless of height. The best CB in the AFC West is still Brandon Flowers, and he is short.

Besides, in our scheme, the height thing is kinda over rated. We have our CB keeping things in front of them, so their reach is not going to prevent the ball from being thrown over them.

Right. I would prefer a taller CB also. Nobody is saying that we should knock Verrett off of our draft board altogether. I am saying his lack of height is a weakness that warrants a slight downgrading of the player for the reason that he would tend to struggle in some situations because of that liability (against taller receivers). The point being that he may not be able to "simply play" in some situations.

Revis is not a good comparison because he is 2 inches taller and his arms are two inches longer. Those 4+ inches matter.

Even Flowers is an inch taller and has slightly longer arms, but that is a much closer comparison. In a shallower overall 2008 draft, he was taken with the 35th pick by the Chiefs. I think that is close to where Verrett should go, so I do not think Verrett is value at #25 for us. And, because we have S. Williams already, I do not think he is a great fit for us. I would rather have Gilbert, Dennard or Fuller because they are better period and because they are bigger, they are all probably a better fit for us in light of our other personnel.

[Yubaking]

I think the fact that you have to point out that it's one of your shorter posts and post paragraph/word statistics speaks volumes. "Brevity is the soul of wit." Learn to be concise, please.

I didn't say it was one of my shorter posts. Again with the mischaracterization, and this time it is a mischaracterization of a one line post. One line. Wow!

What I said was that it was about 6 paragraphs and 476 words. Why would I say that it is one of my shorter posts? It isn't. I just find it funny that you appear to have problems dealing with it.

[Panama]

Right. I would prefer a taller CB also. Nobody is saying that we should knock Verrett off of our draft board altogether. I am saying his lack of height is a weakness that warrants a slight downgrading of the player for the reason that he would tend to struggle in some situations because of that liability (against taller receivers). The point being that he may not be able to "simply play" in some situations.

Revis is not a good comparison because he is 2 inches taller and his arms are two inches longer. Those 4+ inches matter.

Even Flowers is an inch taller and has slightly longer arms, but that is a much closer comparison. In a shallower overall 2008 draft, he was taken with the 35th pick by the Chiefs. I think that is close to where Verrett should go, so I do not think Verrett is value at #25 for us. And, because we have S. Williams already, I do not think he is a great fit for us. I would rather have Gilbert, Dennard or Fuller because they are better period and because they are bigger, they are all probably a better fit for us in light of our other personnel.

Me thinks you're too in love with measurables. I want football players, no matter how big, tall, fast, or bearded.

[Panama]

I didn't say it was one of my shorter posts. Again with the mischaracterization, and this time it is a mischaracterization of a one line post. One line. Wow!

What I said was that it was about 6 paragraphs and 476 words. Why would I say that it is one of my shorter posts? It isn't. I just find it funny that you appear to have problems dealing with it.

:I-can't-think-of-a-witty-rejoinder-so-I'll-post-a-logo logo:

[Steve]

Right. I would prefer a taller CB also. Nobody is saying that we should knock Verrett off of our draft board altogether. I am saying his lack of height is a weakness that warrants a slight downgrading of the player for the reason that he would tend to struggle in some situations because of that liability (against taller receivers). The point being that he may not be able to "simply play" in some situations.

Revis is not a good comparison because he is 2 inches taller and his arms are two inches longer. Those 4+ inches matter.

Even Flowers is an inch taller and has slightly longer arms, but that is a much closer comparison. In a shallower overall 2008 draft, he was taken with the 35th pick by the Chiefs. I think that is close to where Verrett should go, so I do not think Verrett is value at #25 for us. And, because we have S. Williams already, I do not think he is a great fit for us. I would rather have Gilbert, Dennard or Fuller because they are better period and because they are bigger, they are all probably a better fit for us in light of our other personnel.

You think on a pass coming in, thrown by an NFL QB, having traveled 30-40 yards in the air, 2-inches makes a big enough difference to even be boticeable? The guys technique, regardless of size, would give him more effective size then the extra height would.

And again, since we play our CB off, and have them play the WR in front, the reach thing is really not that big an issue. If a CB is 6'2" or 6'3", I might give them a slight bump. I would give them slightly more if they were playing in a bump and run scheme. But in ours, I am not sure I would even bother to waste the time putting the detail on the form.

[Yubaking]

You think on a pass coming in, thrown by an NFL QB, having traveled 30-40 yards in the air, 2-inches makes a big enough difference to even be boticeable? The guys technique, regardless of size, would give him more effective size then the extra height would.

And again, since we play our CB off, and have them play the WR in front, the reach thing is really not that big an issue. If a CB is 6'2" or 6'3", I might give them a slight bump. I would give them slightly more if they were playing in a bump and run scheme. But in ours, I am not sure I would even bother to waste the time putting the detail on the form.

I think you are oversimplifying my view if you think I am discussing only height. It is height, arm length and body size. It is not just as simple as saying "two inches". With bigger receivers, there is a 9-10 inch length advantage before body size and body position come into play. With even average size CBs, that overall length disadvantage is cut in half. Further, CBs with bigger bodies than Verrett should be comparatively more effective at overcoming the WR's attempt to shield with his body.

Technique is mostly irrelevant if the ball is thrown up to where the bigger man can shield with his body and go up for or reach out for the ball. The CB can be all over the WR and it will not matter. In fact, I would even give Verrett the benefit of the doubt and assume that with his speed, there will be many times when he has blanket coverage, but the WR will catch the ball anyway if it is thrown well enough. His lack of size will give QBs a greater margin of error in their throws too.

While I realize there is not an exact translation in what I am about to say, I can guarantee you that when I played many years of basketball, as a 6'4" player, nobody 5'9" tall ever denied me an entry pass or took a rebound away from me that I was in position to grab. It isn't that I was all that great, skilled, physically gifted or anything like that. Rather, those situations were just physical mismatches with me having 7" in height and another 4+" of arm length advantage for an 11+" advantage even before my bigger body and body positioning came into play. On passes, anywhere close and out of the defender's reach was usually more than adequate in such circumstances.

Similarly, bigger WRs and TEs have been using their bigger bodies to reach where defenders cannot and shield defenders from passes for years to the point that NFL GMs have looked at some basketball players as potential NFL receivers, realizing that their ability to position their body to receive the ball such that other players cannot get to it is useful in the NFL. I think we have some guy named Gates who has been okay at doing that.

Again, nobody is saying that this means Verrett is not an NFL player, just that he does not represent first round value, like most players do not. Because of his other physical gifts, which are well above average and his proven collegiate history as a top level player, I think this makes Verrett a clear and strong second round player. I think it is likely that he will be drafted in the first half of the second round, which is where I think he should be drafted.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

Technique is mostly irrelevant if the ball is thrown up to where the bigger man can shield with his body and go up for or reach out for the ball.

This demonstrates that you don't know what "technique" means as it relates to the position. What you're saying is an aspect of playing the position. It's not the entirety of technique that denies opponents positive outcomes on passes.

While I realize there is not an exact translation in what I am about to say, I can guarantee you that when I played many years of basketball, as a 6'4" player, nobody 5'9" tall ever denied me an entry pass or took a rebound away from me that I was in position to grab.

Did a 5'9" player ever prevent you from being in position to grab it? Now we can maybe talk about what technique means. What if the pass wasn't on target, say, too low for you? Or behind you? On a sidenote, I wonder how many of those 5'9" defenders had Verrett's speed, quickness, hand-eye coordination or leaping ability? Never mind. Rhetorical.

Similarly, bigger WRs and TEs have been using their bigger bodies to reach where defenders cannot and shield defenders from passes for years to the point that NFL GMs have looked at some basketball players as potential NFL receivers, realizing that their ability to position their body to receive the ball such that other players cannot get to it is useful in the NFL. I think we have some guy named Gates who has been okay at doing that.

If it were all about that, the whole story in the NFL would be about getting the tallest guys. But it's not. Teyo Johnson, Alvin Harper and Mikhael Ricks didn't dominate. It also has to do with speed, route-running, quickness in and out of moves, hands, timing and leaping ability, reading defenses and rapport with the QB. You do Gates a disservice by saying his success is all physical. That's part of it. But there is a whole lot more to it than your simplistic logic exercise, which has very little to do (apparently) with actual knowledge or experience. Meanwhile, you act like it's just a matter of throwing it up and letting tall guys catch it. But how many receivers--even tall ones--excel at that? We've been spoiled here with Floyd, Gates, DX and VJ in recent years....oh and a guy like Rivers who is a master at timing and touch on those kinds of throws. So how many receivers and QBs are actually good at it? Are there so many that it's worth taking an inferior player who is taller? Again, rhetorical.

Again, nobody is saying that this means Verrett is not an NFL player, just that he does not represent first round value, like most players do not. Because of his other physical gifts, which are well above average and his proven collegiate history as a top level player, I think this makes Verrett a clear and strong second round player. I think it is likely that he will be drafted in the first half of the second round, which is where I think he should be drafted.

Just like you think it was right for Drew Brees and Russell Wilson not to be taken in the first round, because of their physical/measurable "red flags." And yet, a do-over in those drafts would have both players taken in the top 10, if not top 5. The best time to stop digging that hole you've been working on was yesterday. Today is the second best time.

I confess to not knowing what kind of pro Verrett will be. But I've seen him play and if he were the pick at 25, I'd be pretty stoked. He's a very good CB. Sure, I wish he was taller. But I'm not going to quibble if he can play. But simply discounting him bc of his height and measurables (which is, actually, what you're doing) is reductive and ridiculous. The number of examples at CB and at other positions is too numerous to detail here.

[Steve]

I think you are oversimplifying my view if you think I am discussing only height. It is height, arm length and body size. It is not just as simple as saying "two inches". With bigger receivers, there is a 9-10 inch length advantage before body size and body position come into play. With even average size CBs, that overall length disadvantage is cut in half. Further, CBs with bigger bodies than Verrett should be comparatively more effective at overcoming the WR's attempt to shield with his body.

Technique is mostly irrelevant if the ball is thrown up to where the bigger man can shield with his body and go up for or reach out for the ball. The CB can be all over the WR and it will not matter. In fact, I would even give Verrett the benefit of the doubt and assume that with his speed, there will be many times when he has blanket coverage, but the WR will catch the ball anyway if it is thrown well enough. His lack of size will give QBs a greater margin of error in their throws too.

While I realize there is not an exact translation in what I am about to say, I can guarantee you that when I played many years of basketball, as a 6'4" player, nobody 5'9" tall ever denied me an entry pass or took a rebound away from me that I was in position to grab. It isn't that I was all that great, skilled, physically gifted or anything like that. Rather, those situations were just physical mismatches with me having 7" in height and another 4+" of arm length advantage for an 11+" advantage even before my bigger body and body positioning came into play. On passes, anywhere close and out of the defender's reach was usually more than adequate in such circumstances.

Similarly, bigger WRs and TEs have been using their bigger bodies to reach where defenders cannot and shield defenders from passes for years to the point that NFL GMs have looked at some basketball players as potential NFL receivers, realizing that their ability to position their body to receive the ball such that other players cannot get to it is useful in the NFL. I think we have some guy named Gates who has been okay at doing that.

Again, nobody is saying that this means Verrett is not an NFL player, just that he does not represent first round value, like most players do not. Because of his other physical gifts, which are well above average and his proven collegiate history as a top level player, I think this makes Verrett a clear and strong second round player. I think it is likely that he will be drafted in the first half of the second round, which is where I think he should be drafted.

I am almost definitely mis-stating what you mean, since you are stating it pretty poorly.

But don't you think a big part of why they never took a ball away from your relates a great deal to the quality of the passes you received, and the fact that the average basketball game has very few scenarios that are similar to how football is played. In basketball, you mostly square up to one another at ultra short range and are able to bounce passes over, under and past one another. In football, you run continuously mostly running directly side by side. My experience in grad school I got in a lot of football games against much taller and faster opponents, and gave up very few receptions by jamming them at the line and then not letting them get separation because I knew how/when to flip my hips and run in transition. Technique beats raw ability almost every time.

Yes, height gives an increased catching radius, but if height was as important as you seem to claim, how is it that football teams don't all have 6'5" receivers? Most don't have any, and mos that do only have 1 or 2. Plus, remember all those years that Floyd and VJ didn't do crap? If height is so important, why is that important unless short DB's have some way of compensating. Yes, height gives an advantage if all things are equal, but they rarely are.

In our defensive scheme, we play off man and off zone coverage, read the route and break on it in front. How on earth, if you give up position like that, does height help? You have a slight increase in the radius you can catch, but that is inches in a game where even the shortest passes are rarely under 20 yards in the air. Leverage alone suggests that technique is far more important. Height really only helps a DB if they are between the QB and the receiver, forcing the ball up and over.

Receivers use size to win the position game, but they do it in combination with running routes, so size alone means nothing. if it didn't why are there no 6'5" CB in football. If what you suggest is true, why don't NFL teams get taller CB? because they cannot break down and run with receivers, which is why most tall CB fail. Again, going back to kids on the playground, the guys with the best transition/change of direction are usually shorter, quicker kids. The fastest sprinters (40, 50 to 100 m) are guys who are relatively short (6' ish), while the tall guys tend to run the longer sprints (200 m, 400 m, 600 m, and 800 m).

You may think that Verrett doesn't represent a 1st round value, but I think the opposite is true. I think given the scheme we play, and the fact that many NFL teams still stupidly believe in window shopping, using measureables blindly like you do, that he may well represent a real value pick in the 1st. That other teams are under valuing him, and we can get a bargain at the bottom of the 1st. But Verrett will get knocked down because he isn't that classic bump and run guy, and that is an opportunity, not a problem.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

You may think that Verrett doesn't represent a 1st round value, but I think the opposite is true. I think given the scheme we play, and the fact that many NFL teams still stupidly believe in window shopping, using measureables blindly like you do, that he may well represent a real value pick in the 1st. That other teams are under valuing him, and we can get a bargain at the bottom of the 1st. But Verrett will get knocked down because he isn't that classic bump and run guy, and that is an opportunity, not a problem.

Great point.

My gut tells me that if TT is targeting a CB at 25, Verrett is in his top 3-4. Right now, I sort of suspect he will be the pick.